, /O -F . , . '< '). o q- ;; .... l offee , 'rq . , . .' , .'" . , O ;,\t; ; ", .':_ <-'ii &()'e'1 S"tø .. . . . Jó :"; . w..,,,.. .... "'..,." Y to'.... ." ./! ....... . .'/1.' ;)) . '",: ' ' ;!f'> y':' ,; ' : .... 0' . ;.<.: , ,'<1-"' I ' fi, ,,'-''',,/oy -f4,e '.. ;-;r tJ ë'Rcepfi'I\-'( ;1: ,,: ,:- :'; f(!, of fAvb"'''k.{' /'if ()M.e. ,', ,<, 'j:,: . .., A- . ...; íJ fldJJ ' ' ,< 'f., ',: <:'. <.' -' .'" , <:' , '" - Iy' .' .' . ... . . . ::" 4,.... tJf 4& 1 ::::; +". .,' ".: ,- +At.1 ; ; '!: iC:: ' . \\O : iElIi1:'t' ,",., : .... =;j '. ..{ ",:Jr , " .'"!".:: ::-t ,"' <:; { " THE MAIL THE DIVIDEND ON TAXES As Hendrik Hertzberg suggests, there are several ironies at work in President Bush's proposal to end the tax on divi- dend income in the name of stimulat- ing the economy (The Talk of the Town, January 20th). In the past, one argu- ment in favor of the dividend tax was that the tax itself could serve as an eco- nomic stimulus. The logic was that people who received dividends viewed them as ordinary income and spent them in ordinary ways; the tax, by in- hibiting investors' demand for these payouts, would allow companies to in- vest more of their funds in new equip- ment and enterprises-something they could do better than individuals. Thus, everybody would benefit: the corpora- tions from additional profits, the share- holders from the resulting rise in stock price, the Treasury from the tax reve- nues, and the public from the impetus that all this would give to the world of business, including new jobs. The truth is that the economy will adjust to al- most anything, but changes, even desir- able ones, are likely to cause disrup- tions. Abolishing the dividend tax, for instance, could possibly have an imme- diate deflationary effect-which could be as dangerous, in the current circum- stances, as inflation is at other times- I because the monies liberated by the abolition could not be recirculated fast enough to compensate for the loss of income and cuts in spending by the states. And this outcome would be the opposite of what the President says he wants to achieve. Aristides Vertes New York City SIERRA LEONE'S TRAGEDY As one of thousands of Peace Corps volunteers who have worked in Sierra Leone over the years, I read George Packer's article on the country's child amputees-victims of atrocities in Sierra Leone's civil war-with appreciation, frustration, and anguish ("The Children of Freetown," January 13th). I lived in Freetown in the early nineteen-sixties, when Sierra Leone's future seemed so bright. I last visited soon after the out- break of civil war in 1991, and saw skulls mounted along the roads. Packer tells the story of the handful of children who were brought to America for treat- ment by a group of Staten Islanders, and of the conflict over whether they should be returned to their families in Sierra Leone, as had originally been planned, or helped to start new lives here. But there are three larger ques- tions: Who and what were responsible for that country's descent into hell? What can be done to enable Sierra Leone and its West Mrican neighbors to develop as stable and productive societies? And whose responsibility is it to make that happen? Kevin G Lowther Springfield, Va. SAN FRANCISCO TREATS Regarding Calvin Trillin's article on the supposed superiority of New York City to San Francisco in the area of take- out: lies, lies, lies ("Local Bounty," J anu- ary 20th). I am sitting in our San Fran- cisco apartment looking at a mountain of takeout menus-yes, we call it take- out here, too-Chinese, Japanese, Thai, Italian, Indian, you name it. We even have our groceries delivered. (It's not that we're so busy. We just can't move our car; we'd lose our parking space.) The oIÙY truth in that piece of fiction is that our burritos are perfect. But "two or three. . . rolled-up meals"? The thing costs oIÙY four dollars! To rewrap half a burrito in its broken foil, stick it in the refrigerator, and eat it, congealed and tasteless, the next day-is that the New York way? Joanne Holland San Francisco, Calif . Letters should be sent with the writer s name address and daytime phone number via e-mail to themail@newyorker.com. They can also be faxed to 212-286-5047. Letters may be edited for length and clarity and may be publtshed in any medium; we regret that owing to the volume of correspondence we cannot reply to every letter.